Sunday, August 11, 2013

Fukushima Commentary | Fukushima Accident | Fukushima Disaster

Fukushima Commentary | Fukushima Accident | Fukushima Disaster
On July 23, Tepco revealed that contamination is leaching into their
inner port (quay) at Fukushima Daiichi. Tepco and the Nuclear Regulatory
Authority make it seem as if the contamination is going into the
Pacific Ocean. There are many unanswered questions with the groundwater
issue, but one thing seems certain…the material is not reaching the open
sea, at least not yet. Tepco’s recent revelation validates the NRA
conjecture of 10 days ago. Tepco’s bases their belief on the water level
in the near-shore sampling wells fluctuating with the tide. However,
the data Tepco has posted over the past four months raises a
considerable number of questions.
First we might ask…what is the
source of the contamination? Since the groundwater contains Cesium
isotopes 134 and 137, it cannot be coming from any of the waste water
storage tanks or underground reservoirs at F. Daiichi. This is because
those waters have been effectively stripped of their Cesium content by
the station’s “makeshift” filtration system. There are several possible
sources. (1) The radioactivity may be coming from basements of the four
units holding 70,000 tons of water literally loaded with Cesium. (2) It
could be what Tepco has said for more than a month and be residual
isotopes already in the plant’s soil from a rather significant leak into
a trench between unit #1 and unit #2 reactor buildings in April, 2011.
(3) Could it have something to do with another trench from unit #3?
Tepco quietly posted a Press handout concerning the possibility of a
unit #3 leak on July 11. (http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2013/images/handouts_130711_04-e.pdf ) Or, could it be a combination of all three?
If
we assume the contamination is coming from the basements, it poses a
pair of over-lapping questions. To begin, Tepco knows that 400 tons of
groundwater is seeping into the basements every day. How’s the
groundwater getting in there? Cracks in the concrete walls? Broken
piping penetrations? The flowpath into the basements has not been
stated. Whatever the path of seepage, groundwater is leaking into the
basements and there’s no reason to think the contaminated waters are not
leaking out via the same pathways. The Nuclear Regulatory Authority
wants to freeze the ground surrounding the turbine buildings using an
earth-freezing technology that does not yet exist. While the mere
suggestion puts the technical competence to the NRA in question, if it
works it will merely lower the in-flow of groundwater by 100 tons per
day. Tepco already has what seems to be a better methodology to stanch
the groundwater influx. They are drilling holes deep in the ground along
the shoreline and inserting a chemical to harden the soil itself. (http://210.250.6.22/en/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2013/images/handouts_130708_03-e.pdf
) Why not do the same thing around the basements of the turbine
buildings, too? If it is good enough to keep contaminated groundwater
from getting into the station’s near-shore quay, it will surely be
better than the NRA’s pie-in-the-sky concoction to freeze the soil.
Water-proofing the soils surrounding the basements, and around the
suspect cable trench coming out of unit #2 should eliminate it as a
source of possible leaks. Then there’s the unit #3 trench, but we’ll
come back to it later.
Next, how bad is the groundwater
contamination? Is it really “highly radioactive”? The highest
groundwater Cesium reading to date is 11,000 Becquerels per liter inside
one of the now-numerous sampling wells at F. Daiichi. Sounds like a
lot, doesn’t it. Want to know what’s actually highly
radioactive? The water in one of the trenches connected to the unit #2
turbine basement! The Press reports Tepco has found it to contain 2.35 billion
Bq/liter of Cesium. That can be called “highly radioactive” by any
standard. If 11,000 Bq/liter is “highly radioactive”, then what
descriptive term should the Press use for 2.35 billion Bq/liter?
To
continue, three of the groundwater sampling wells have elevated levels
of Tritium (more on this later), but only one has shown increases in
both Cesium isotopes over the past 2 weeks. (see the Tepco handout,
above, for well locations). Well no. 1-2has readings of 11,000 Becquerel
per liter for Cs-137 and 5,400 Bq/liter for Cs-134. (http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/f1/smp/2013/images/2tb-east_13072301-e.pdf ) These are the contamination levels that are always
cited in the Press, both inside and outside of Japan, even though the
Cesium in the rest of the wells is about 100 times lower. But here’s the
important point…when the sample water from well #1-2 has the suspended
solids filtered out, the cleansed water has readings of 50 Bq/liter of
Cs-134 and 71 Bq/liter of Cs-137. (http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/f1/smp/2013/images/2tb-east_13072303-e.pdf
) These readings are higher than the other four near-shore sampling
wells, but more than 99% lower than unfiltered. This demonstrates that
the vast majority of the Cesium in the unfiltered sample is contained in
the suspended sediment, probably stirred up by the fluctuating water
level in the well. So, why doesn’t Tepco post the filtered sample data
along with the unfiltered for well #1-2? It seems they only posted the
unfiltered data only once on July 22nd. Further, has Tepco
attempted to filter the sample waters taken from the other near-shore
wells? If not, why not? This could be significant.
Here’s why it is important. Since the filtering of suspended solids
removes more than 99% of the radioactivity, the Cesium is clearly bonded
with the soil. The only way the high levels of Cesium in the
groundwater can get into the station’s quay would be if the soil itself
is being spilled into the seawater. Is it? With the station’s quay
effectively isolated from the outer port area, and the outer port
surrounded by some massive break-walls, there is no shore erosion. There
might be a tiny loss of Cesium-impregnated soil leaving the shore, but
the vast majority is staying put. We can say this with confidence when
we look at the Cesium level inside the essentially stagnant quay. We
find that all sampling points have not demonstrably changed in Cs-134
and Cs-137 concentrations since early April. (http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/f1/smp/2013/images/intake_canal_130726-e.pdf
) The levels have fluctuated over the past four months, but that is to
be expected with activity levels as low as these in full liter samples.
The range of upper and lower fluctuation points has stayed quite
constant for all 12 sampling points along the quay’s shoreline. If there
is a “highly radioactive” leak coming out of unit #3, there does not
seem to be an increased Cesium level to prove it. It should be noted
that the Cesium levels inside the quay have not changed significantly
since March, 2012, but the above link back to April 2013 should suffice
for this commentary.
Next we have the detected Tritium (H3), which raises more questions. Well number 1-2 has an H3
level of 350,000 Bq/liter, well number 1-3 is at 270,000 Bq/liter, and
well #1 has 420,000 Bq/liter. (Wells 1-2 and 1-3 are between units
2&3 reactor buildings, and well #1 is next to reactor building #1)
The Cs-134 levels in both well #1 and well 1-3 are…undetectable! The
Cs-137 in both is less than 1Bq/liter. Why is the well with the highest
level of Tritium not showing any Cesium? There is no correlation between H3
concentrations and the Cesium concentrations. There ought to be a
correlation, but there isn’t. Why is there no correlation between
isotopic concentrations? On a related note, why is there an elevated
level of H3 (1,100 Bq/liter) at the unit #1 near-shore
sampling point, but less than 400 Bq/liter everywhere else in the quay?
If there is a leak to the quay is out of the unit #3 trench, why isn’t
the quay water adjacent to unit #3 showing an increase over the levels
detected in April?
Finally we get to the ultimate question. Is any
of this contamination going out to sea? The inner Quay is sealed off
from the waters which are inside the heavy stone break-walls that
surround the station. The break-wall has a single opening to the open
sea. Seawater sampling outside the quay, but inside the break-wall shows
nothing. No detectible Tritium…no detectible Cesium. It appears the
contamination in the quay is not getting into the outer port area. The
silt dam that seals the entrance to the quay seems to be doing its job
quite well. In addition, samples taken from the open sea surrounding F.
Daiichi also show nothing. In other words, there seems to be no
groundwater-borne contamination going into the Pacific Ocean from
Fukushima Daiichi. So, why do the Nuclear Regulatory Authority and Tepco
both make it sound like the Pacific Ocean is being “tainted”?
Many
might question the veracity of the data posted by Tepco’s staff at F.
Daiichi, given the general level of distrust relative to the company.
But, there is no-one else’s data to analyze. Keep in mind that Tepco
discovered the problem with groundwater contamination. No-one else did.
They are the ones who have reported it to the world, albeit
belatedly…and there-in lies the problem. The company’s level of
transparency relative to public disclosure is not perfect, and some of
their statements may be tainted with paranoiac twists, but their
radiological data should not be distrusted. We have no other data to go
on.
Questions…questions…questions…

July 20, 2013

Naoto Kan: Japan’s Pinocchio

This
past Tuesday, Naoto Kan submitted a defamation suit against Prime
Minister Shinzo Abe. It is very unusual for a former prime minister to
sue an incumbent. The suit is because Abe posted an Email on March 20,
2011, saying Kan fabricated his part in the infamous seawater cooling
dispute during the Fukushima accident. Abe also said Kan’s trying to
stop Tepco from cooling with seawater is a case of severe mismanagement
and that he should resign. Kan charges Abe with keeping “erroneous”
information on his website and ignoring Kan’s repeated entreaties to
remove the Email from archives. Kan also charges Abe with making a
“false accusation” that defames the former PM. Since the Email has not
been deleted, Kan has filed the suit, along with $110,000 in damages. In
response…well…there is no response from Mr. Abe. He refuses to comment.